Excerpt: - - 1d by the wto, the assessee field an appeal before the aac, but without success......years, the shares came to be quoted on the madras stock exchange in march, 1977, and the market value quoted then was rs. 135 per share. the tribunal did not go into the question as to whether the wto was justified in invoking r. 1d, but proceeded to hold that the estimate of the market value by the wto even under r. 1d was excessive having regard to the fact that the shares were quoted on the madras stock exchange just about a few months after the relevant date at rs. 135 per share, the value given by the assessee at rs. 150 per share can be taken to be a reasonable value for the shares even assuming that the wto can determine the market value by applying r. 1d of the rules, still the reasonableness of that estimate can be gone into by the tribunal. 3. in these cases, the tribunal.....

Judgment:

Ramanujam, J.

1. The assessee, in these petitions, owned certain shares in the Premier Cotton Spinning Mills Ltd. and M/s. Lakshmi Card Clothing . In the wealth-tax assessment years 1975-76 and 1976-77, for the purpose of wealth-tax assessment, the assessee had valued the shares of Premier Cotton Spinning Mills Ltd. at Rs. 150 and the shares of Lakshmi Card Clothing Manufacturing Co. at Rs. 180.54. The WTO, however, did not accept the value of the shares as furnished by the assessee. He proceeded to determine the market value on the basis of r. 1D of the W. T. Rules and valued the shares in Premier Cotton Spinning Mills at Rs. 309.37 and the other shares at Rs. 281.60 for the assessment year 1975-76. For the assessment year 1976-77, the shares had been valued at Rs. 262.82 in respect of Lakshmi Card Clothing Manufacturing Co. and at Rs. 328.24 for the shares of Premier Cotton Spinning Mills, again following the method in r. 1D of the Rules. Aggrieved by the valuation of the shares under r. 1D by the WTO, the assessee field an appeal before the AAC, but without success. Thereafter, the assessee went before the Tribunal.

2. Before the Tribunal, the assessee gave up her attack against the valuation made by the WTO as regards the shares in Lakshmi Card Clothing Manufacturing Co., because the difference between the value as given by the assessee and the value estimated by the WTO was negligible. Therefore, the controversy before the Tribunal was only with regard to the valuation of the other shares as made by the WTO applying r. 1D of the W.T. Rules. The Tribunal found that though the shares were unquoted on the relevant valuation dates in both the years, the shares came to be quoted on the Madras Stock Exchange in March, 1977, and the market value quoted then was Rs. 135 per share. The Tribunal did not go into the question as to whether the WTO was justified in invoking r. 1D, but proceeded to hold that the estimate of the market value by the WTO even under r. 1D was excessive having regard to the fact that the shares were quoted on the Madras Stock Exchange just about a few months after the relevant date at Rs. 135 per share, the value given by the assessee at Rs. 150 per share can be taken to be a reasonable value for the shares even assuming that the WTO can determine the market value by applying r. 1D of the Rules, still the reasonableness of that estimate can be gone into by the Tribunal.

3. In these cases, the Tribunal after taking into account the value of the shares as determined by the WTO by applying r. 1D of the Rules, found that there is a variation in the value as quoted on the stock exchange. The Tribunal also took note of the fact that even though the shares were not quoted on the stock exchange prior to March, 1977, there have been transactions in shares as registered in the books of the company and the value indicated in these transfers is considerably less than the market value arrived at by the WTO and, therefore, the value quoted by the assessee can be taken as fairly representing the market value of the shares. In view of the said finding rendered by the Tribunal, we do not think that any reference is justified in these cases. The tax case petitions are, accordingly, dismissed. No costs.